Recall Campaign to try getting Stanford Judge removed over light sentencing

Rampant narcissism, apathy, and sociopathy?

3 Likes

Hey! Stop cheering me up. Okay, no, I take that back. More kittehs please :cry:

4 Likes

6 Likes

In this context, I really needed that. Thanks. :+1:

4 Likes

If I’m gonna be happy, you’re gonna be happy too!!

I’m the Rorschach of positive feelings.

5 Likes

7 Likes

A Turner waving his floppy tomahawk.

1 Like

Glad to see I’m not alone in this. What is it about being drunk that makes you want to eat the weirdest crap? My most recent inebriation featured me in the corner of my girlfriend’s bedroom eating my way through a colossal bag of caramel corn while lamenting to her my status as a vampire squid in an overwrought metaphor.

3 Likes

It’s been a while since I’ve gotten good and smashed, but oddly alcohol causes me to lose my appetite. Mary Jane too, and caffeine. What all of those do do is get me in the mood to cook. Which makes a very symbiotic friend :smile:

2 Likes

To add to that: Not every first-time drunken rapist is a first-time drunken rapist.

I have the misfortune of knowing someone who made international headlines a few years ago when, at age 50 he was convicted of drunkenly raping a 16-year-old, claiming that she raped him.

He spent only a few months in jail for it. Because, among other things, it was his “first offence.”

In reality it was his first conviction. I found out a decade before that he was a serial rapist. As a relative of his casually put it at the time, “Well. ____, he gets drunk once in a while and rapes someone. One of these days it’ll get him in trouble.”

I was already avoiding him - Let’s just say it’s not the only way he destroys lives. But I put extra effort into avoiding him after that. The last I heard he was convicted for internet luring.

6 Likes

Yup. Most tigers don’t change their stripes. As with most serious crimes, the first conviction is probably not actually the first offense.

3 Likes

I AM ABSOLUTELY IN FAVOR OF REHABILITATION BUT HOLY FUCKING SHIT THIS IS WHAT OUBLIETTES WERE INVENTED FOR!!

 

7 Likes

Yeah yaller probably right that his crime isn’t the first time. Lookit his own Dad’s attitude towards it…

Dad seems to think it’s no thing, and probably has related as much to his son over the years.

Bros birthing Bros, it’s disgusting.

2 Likes

Oubliette. Oblada. Life goes on, brah…

2 Likes

That is so incredibly fucked up, and yet not surprising.

Its like some people don’t get it that forcing anything into anyone’s orifices without their explicit permission is actually WRONG, on so many levels, and that’s why it’s a fucking crime which should be taken seriously.

10 Likes

A friend of mine wrote this,

On the whole stanford sexual assault case - the people who are rightly upset about the sentence being too lenient are also people who are likely to want more lenient sentencing generally, repeal three strikes laws, and reduce mandatory minimum sentencing.

Pillorying a judge for giving a lenient sentence plays right into the hands of DAs and prison owners who would love to roll back recent efforts at sentencing reform. It’s going to scare every other superior court judge in California out of showing leniency to defendants and trap thousands more people in our prison system for longer than they otherwise might be, for fear that some tea party nut is going to challenge them from the right.

Unless everybody I know is really prepared to veer right on criminal sentencing generally, I’d suggest people take a different critique - that it’s unlikely this judge was as lenient with similarly situated offenders who are poor and/or of color, and insofar as that’s true, that’s the real problem.

On the other hand, it’s totally valid to want harsher mandatory minimum sentencing, but it’s important to realize it’s going to have the largest impact in cases where you find the defendant sympathetic. Bad rulings like this one are the unfortunate consequence of giving judges discretion to be lenient in the many cases where we’d want the judge to be able to do so.

This sentencing issue is analogous to the fourth amendment - yes, it’s unfortunate that the exclusionary rule means that guilty criminals go free because evidence was gathered unconstitutionally, but we are all better off in a system where that happens, even if it produces individual outcomes that are unjust and outrageous.

3 Likes

To quote jason scott.

‘At that point you are no longer part of the fucking human race. wE get to turn you into a sandwich for bears.’

NO.

Here in Canada, every few years someone gets released after years in jail for a rape/murder, later found to be innocent. Usually they were railroaded by police who “knew” they were guilty. (The “jailhouse confession” is a common tool, one career criminal even showing up in several high-profile railroading cases, often getting a reduced sentence or other favors in return for reporting a “confession.”)

Stick to due process. Even post-conviction.

4 Likes

I’d go a step further.

Even if he’s guilty as sin: confession, video evidence, DNA, if an angel descends from the very heavens and confirms that he did it…

NOTHING justifies torturing and/or killing him for his crimes.

5 Likes

but he seems like such a nice boy.

1 Like